Lil Red Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 (edited) [quote name='traichuoi' date='Oct 27 2004, 04:08 PM'] something i've always wondered is when they talk about the woman's right to choose, they call the child a fetus. but when they talk about how it endangers the woman's life, they refer to her as a mother. hmmm [/quote] just like it's okay for a woman to murder her own fetus (not human), but if someone kills a pregnant woman, it's called double homicide (because the baby is somehow more human?!). Edited October 28, 2004 by Lil Red Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote name='Good Friday' date='Oct 27 2004, 11:01 PM'] And to think, you used to be so nice. I suppose further catechesis has led you to turn into a little Ironmonk-in-training? That's very sad . . . I guess Catholics don't stay nice as they age. [/quote] I hate to say it, Nate, but I could say the same thing to you -- you used to be so nice. But now you come on Phatmass and attack those who dare to disagree with your heterodox stances. You can't deny that you just personally attacked Ironmonk and Flowery by accusing them of things they're not guilty of. They haven't been mean to you, but you claim they are just because you don't want to hear what they have to say. Here's something that you used to know once upon a time but have conveniently forgotten -- it's the truth that's not nice if you don't want to hear it and have closed your heart and mind to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iacobus Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote name='littleflower' date='JMJ+Oct 27 2004, 10:02 PM'] lets not forget this is a public forum peeps, whose striving to be obedient to the Holy Mother Church, and supporting a pro-abortion candidate would be the LAST thing any faithful cathoilc would be doing. dnagerous from what? sorry but we all will have to answer to God for upholding the dignity and sacredness of Life.... and all this phorum does is point to what the Church tells us, im sorry if you happen to disagree... pax. [/quote] It is public, which makes that tax stuff apply. I know that Phatmass is striving to be faithful to the Church, but the tax status gets risky when names are used. If all that was said was "Don't vote for the pro abortion guy" that would be one thing, but when "Don't vote for Kerry" is said that is when it gets "dangerous." And my dangerous I mean with the tax code. This is a real nasty year. Don't forgot about the suit against the publishers of the Catholic voter guide. And they didn't even use names. I am just trying to say that when an officail of PM endores Bush or attacks Kerry a fine line is walked. If they were to only attack "imangary" por abortion people, there would be no issue that I know of. The goal of PM is to spread obedientice to the Church and I just worry what would happen if the tax exempt status was lost. That is all. I am not saying that anyone did anything wrong, but trying to explain what GF was speaking of. Saddly, the IRS doesn't allow for answering God when it comes to taxes. As to the phorum tells us what the Church says, yes that is true for most cases. A post like Zach's about the Church's teachings on voting for a pro abortion politian is one thing. Others blattant attacks on Kerry in the name of Church teaching does teach the Church teach, does spread understanding, but just forms a wedge. Posts like dUSt's post above, at least to me, seem normal. Like JMJTina said they are facts. So yeh, there is nothing wrong with it. But I have seen posts in the past, I think, that made me kinda worried. That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iacobus Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote name='jmjtina' date='Oct 27 2004, 10:17 PM'] Allowing the murder of unborn children is not negative light, it's evil. And for Kerry to allow the murder of innocent children to go on, even encouraged, is to try to sugarcoat the reality of the evil and harm he will do to society if he takes office. In fact it's no "light" at all, but darkness. God Bless. [/quote] But the issue comes with Kerry's name. To speak about McPoltican Pro Abortion causing harm or whatever is okay. But to talk about Kerry, that is when it becomes almost iffy. Like I have said, I think Zach's (I am going to mess this up Qfno1 (?)) posts are a good example of what is allowable. He says "The Church says voting for a pro abortion canaditite is bad and here is where" he doesn't say "The Church says voting for a Kerry is bad." Try to give formula's that can be applied to different cases not answers that have be reduced leaving us to learn the formula. It helps spread understanding. Just my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote]Others blattant attacks on Kerry in the name of Church teaching does teach the Church teach, does spread understanding, but just forms a wedge.[/quote] A wedge? From what I see, it's right and wrong, good from evil and [i]life and death. [/i] Let the wedge divide those who don't hold fast to the teachings of Christ. Pax Christi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iacobus Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote name='Aluigi' date='Oct 27 2004, 10:07 PM'] However, I do believe it is objectively a sin to vote for a pro-abort candidate when there are no proportionate reasons to 4000 babies a day dying. While an erring conscience binds, and it is clear to me your conscience has led you to vote for Kerry, that in my view of Church teaching would make you less culpable for the sin of voting for a pro abortion candidate. I really would hope that you reconsider, but my main concern for you is that you have the Ecclesiology, Theology, and Morality down about the issue of abortion. Everything else is just arguing the specific situation, which is politics. You are not required by the Catholic Faith to believe that President Bush would do a lot of pro-life stuff. But you are required by Catholic Faith to believe that the government should do pro-life stuff and you are required by the Catholic Faith to act in a manner that would help cause the government to do pro-life stuff. That is my .02 Stay strong brother I pray for you constantly Pax Amorque Christi -Aloysius- [/quote] Sorry to make the 3rd post in a row, but this is another good example of explaining the Church's teachings and not leaving "safe" waters. Okay, I shall leave now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littleflower+JMJ Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 O Lord have mercy on us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 (edited) [quote name='Iacobus' date='Oct 27 2004, 10:36 PM'] But the issue comes with Kerry's name. [/quote] So it's okay to [i]support [/i]him using his name, but when it's in negative light, don't say his name. Double standard here. Pax. Edited October 28, 2004 by jmjtina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iacobus Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote name='jmjtina' date='Oct 27 2004, 10:38 PM'] A wedge? From what I see, it's right and wrong, good from evil and [i]life and death. [/i] Let the wedge divide those who don't hold fast to the teachings of Christ. Pax Christi. [/quote] It is right vs wrong, etc. I question your last line, however. Do you want a wedge between those who are right and those who are wrong? How will those in err every figure it out unless someone explains it to them. As to the wedge I was speaking of, I stopped responding (for the most part) to IronMonk's posts months ago because I found him to be rather offensive. Truly, it was people who behaved like him and called themselves Christians that caused me to lose my faith and not seek to find it many years ago. But I digress. What I am speaking of is ad homan (sp?) attacks on Sen Kerry that are carried out under the shield of the Church. We have all, unfourntienaly, seen them. This is what I am talking about as driving a wedge. When people attack Kerry without knowing the full story, when people refuse to be civil in politcal diologues, etc, that is what drives a wedge, not the issue. Let me say this, about half of my friends are very pro life and the other half are very pro choice. And we are friends. Do we talk about abortion? Yes. Does it drive a wedge between any of us, do any of us get upset with another? No. Do I defend and repersent the Church in these talks? Yes, to the best of my skills. Are we always civil to one another? Yes. So clearly, it isn't the issue that is forming the wedge of which I speak, but something in the manner in which it is addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAZEr Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote name='Good Friday' date='Oct 27 2004, 09:50 PM'] By the way, being that you own Phatmass, you risk its tax exempt status as a non-profit organization by endorsing political candidates. I'd hate to think anyone might turn you into the IRS. The tax burden might cause Phatmass to cease to exist, huh? [/quote] You're full of carp. If I were you I would spend more time on my knees praying and less time on the internet wasting my life playing armchair attorney. For ther record, I worked with Priests for Life learning about what a non-profit (and its officials) can and can't do politically. There is no danger for dUSt to share his personal opinions about a candidate for office. What Phatmass can't do is officially endorse, or give money to, any presidential candidate. But dUSt can, he's is NOT Phatmass, at least not legally. For that matter, ANYONE can make a personal endorsement, but a non-profit can't. My priest can stand up next Sunday (outside of mass) and say "I think you should vote for George Bush" he cannot stand up next sunday (in the pulpit) and say "St. Mary's Church (or the Catholic Church) endorses George Bush). The courts recognize the difference between private person and non-profit organizations. You don't cease to be a private person with all the right therein, just because you run a non-profit. Besides, in order to challenge a non-profit's tax exempt status, you have to SUE them. You can't just 'turn them in.' God knows you don't have two nickles to rub together for a lawsuit, and no one out there is going to take on Phatmass pro-bono. It's small potatos. BTW dUSt, if anyone does decide to sue you, stupid as the case is, let me know, my cousin is an attorney in Dallas and I can get him to defend you pro-bono, and we'll sue the pants of whoever challenge your tax-exempt status for harassment, slander, and libel . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAZEr Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 And by the way, Justices to the Texas Supreme Court are elected, not appointed. Bush didn't appoint any pro-abortion judges. Such stupid claims can be easily cleared up by research. LIARS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iacobus Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote name='jmjtina' date='Oct 27 2004, 10:46 PM'] So it's okay to [i]support [/i]him using his name, but when it's in negative light, don't say his name. Double standard here. Pax. [/quote] Firstly, I am not an officaial of PM, thus my statements and yours and IronMonk's and Colleen's and so forth, have no bearing on the tax status. And I was unaware that I was speaking in support of Kerry. I thought I was explaining myself and than giving an example. That was my intent at least. And I know I speak negitivily of Bush and try for the large part to avoid it. I am not 100% but by far better than I used to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAZEr Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Oct 27 2004, 10:50 PM'] Firstly, I am not an officaial of PM, thus my statements and yours and IronMonk's and Colleen's and so forth, have no bearing on the tax status. And I was unaware that I was speaking in support of Kerry. I thought I was explaining myself and than giving an example. That was my intent at least. And I know I speak negitivily of Bush and try for the large part to avoid it. I am not 100% but by far better than I used to be. [/quote] read my quote above . . . dUSt doesn't have to worry about his comments either. [i]*edited by BLAZEr cuz he's a doofus[/i] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iacobus Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote name='BLAZEr' date='Oct 27 2004, 10:47 PM'] For ther record, I worked with Priests for Life learning about what a non-profit (and its officials) can and can't do politically. There is no danger for dUSt to share his personal opinions about a candidate for office. What Phatmass can't do is officially endorse, or give money to, any presidential candidate. But dUSt can, he's is NOT Phatmass, at least not legally. For that matter, ANYONE can make a personal endorsement, but a non-profit can't. My priest can stand up next Sunday and say "I think you should vote for George Bush" he cannot stand up next sunday and say "St. Mary's Church (or the Catholic Church) endorses George Bush). [/quote] Thanks for that post Blazer, it cleared it up for me. I was working off an article and a few news reports I have seen about the non profit tax war this year. Clearly, I was mislead by the articles and reports on what and what not the law said. Thanks for filling me in. However, I still stand my those posts I cited as good examples, because I think they are better than a lot of them. But that is my personal opoion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAZEr Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Oct 27 2004, 10:32 PM'] And my dangerous I mean with the tax code. This is a real nasty year. Don't forgot about the suit against the publishers of the Catholic voter guide. And they didn't even use names. [/quote] Catholic Answers will win that lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts